Perception of LFS

Bill's LFS Login lfsbill at wlmcs.com
Sun Jan 12 06:06:00 PST 2003


On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, Greg Schafer wrote:

> Hi
>
> Someone mentioned this on lfs-support. I found this reference and it is
> really quite disturbing:-
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=103573111822917&w=2
>
>
> Alan Cox says:
>
> "I get so many weird never duplicated reports from linux from scratch people
> that don't happen to anyone else that I treat them with deep suspicion.
> Especially because it sometimes goes away if they instead build the same
> kernel with Debian/Red Hat/.. binutils/gcc"
>
>
> Now THAT is the kind of thing that makes my blood curdle. See my earlier
> <snip>

> Does anyone care about these sorts of issues?
>
> In a "perfect world", LFS would be an enterprise employing real life paid
> developers, and maybe then we might be taken seriously? FFS..
>
> Greg
>

I think *emotionally, yes - we all care. Part of being human. But,
consider the books objectives. Roll your own, learn something in the
process. Become more competent. IIRC, nowhere is an objective of
conforming to the masses (M$ anyone?) view of correctness defined. Nor
is it stated that we wish to make life easy for the developers by
finding bugs only in their official distributions as modded, and
supported, by the major distribution houses.

The only possible genuine criticism of deviation from the book's goals,
I think, is that it says it wants to use "stable" stuff. By implication,
this means things hammered and (more or less) debugged by the hapless
users of the major distros for an extened period. We have deviated from
that in some cases. But only in the CVS version, IIRC.

I don't care. I personally have found great enjoyment and education
following the activities of Greg, Tushar, Mathias et al and the BLFS
folks. The project has stayed (mostly) true to it objectives.

The "Gurus" of the Linux community have their own axe to grind. It may
not include the occasional early/erroneous bug. So what? I am not here
to make their life easier. I will give them them no more respect or
consideration than the folks I mentioned above. Nor will I give them
less respect, unless they earn less respect.

For those who are too young to remember - the *IX communities have
always had one criticism leveled at them. That is that there are not
widely supported standards, too many "mavericks", each does things its
own way, yadda, yadda, yadda. It is exactly this that allowed the
development of Linux and all that subsequently derived from it.

LFS may not yet have reached the "maturity" of other "distros". When it
does, it will adopt the attitudes of the ACs of the world, become no
better or worse than those other distros and some other project will
arise to fill the hole left by the "mature" LFS project.

I will then find that new hole and jump into it.

IMHO.

-- 
Bill Maltby
lfsbill at wlmcs.com

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list